Soul Snatcher, Productions ™ Democracy Wall

9th & Pacific Ave, Tacoma, WA (1-23-21) —

Details presently unknown but appears to be a LEO panicked after being surrounded by a mob in his car and assaulted. Note: A mob is a deadly weapon and unpredictable.

Shelton, WA (1-20-21) — George Steele has been an attorney much of his life and while no scholar is familiar with the law–at least criminal law. But a judge’s judicial temperament is as important as his grasp of the law. Steele’s is brittle, harsh, and presumptuous.

Steele spent some years in Thurston County as a district court deputy prosecutor. He wasn’t especially good at it. He then spent a few years as a mediocre private practice attorney while sharing office space with Bob Brungardt, esq. and Bruce Finlay, esq. in Shelton. The office layout remains fresh because this reporter had to march into it to openly demand payment from George for process services George had requested. Despite the years, such arrogance affects Steele’s courtroom demeanor to this day. He remains an insensitive ham fisted martinet and an approximation of the federal judge (Julius Hoffman) who presided over the Chicago 7 trial.

There were some civil cases and a couple of criminal ones where I was either the opposing party or assisting them. George wasn’t hard to beat and lost all of those cases. Just because you graduate from law school and passed the State bar doesn’t make you a lawyer. Steele is proof of that.

Still, incompetence is as pernicious as corruption in the public sector or on the bench. In addition, exemplary judicial temperament is the sine qua non of a good judge. Steele has none. He’s brittle, almost intoxicated with the power attached to the king’s court, and, most importantly, barely masks a thinly veiled presumption of guilt and hostility toward pro se litigants. Conversely, he is more respectful of card carrying attorneys who are careful (e.g. Bob Brungardt, esq.) to suck up to George like any adroit sycophant would. Videos of the loud smacking noises and evidence of the baggage judge Steele and local attorneys bring to these hearings are being processed/edited. They will appear below, sometimes annotated, when completed.

One recent example consisted of a ZOOM session of assorted defendants being arraigned and many of their attorneys appearing via ZOOM. It became apparent that neither yours truly nor Steele nor the courtroom staff were sufficiently familiar with the software to accommodate a defense attorney’s request when she asked to speak with her client in a ‘breakout box’. After some apologies and fumbling around by the courtroom staff, the attorney and her client who made the request disappeared from the ZOOM screen…then a prompt appeared on mine inviting me to JOIN–which I did. The attorney immediately appeared/sounded uncomfortable with my avatar’s appearance in the breakout box and I ‘left’ it within seconds after recognizing she had sought a feature permitting her to conduct privileged communication with her client. She alerted Steele who immediately assumed the worst when he asked me to unmute. Rathe than ask for an explanation/clarification despite his own confusion relating to the feature, he lead with threats to exclude an observer (myself) from present and future ZOOM court hearings–a direct violation of the 6 Amendment wherein the Constitution guarantees the right to transparency in ALL such proceedings not only to the public, but the litigants! Steele then launched into an insulting lecture about the privileged nature of attorney-client communications, prompting this reporter to opine “for the record, you learn something new [what ZOOM breakout boxes are] every day.” This recorded comment was made after proffering the fact of the prompt directing my avatar to join.

This is only scratching the surface of Steele’s inappropriate courtroom demeanor and deeply ingrained bias against defendants and scrutiny. He is incapable of restraining what goes against his punitive nature. In fact, when it became apparent he had won the race for the judicial position in an election against Eric Valley, esq., Mason County’s office for the public defender immediately announced it would invoke a blanket affidavit of prejudice against Steele (effectively removing him from presiding over any of those cases) which add up to over 80-90% of all the criminal cases heard by the Mason County District Court. This created a crisis of confidence among Mason County’s commissioners because the bill for a judge pro tem to replace Steele for the cases at issue would have been substantial.

Similarly, Steele makes it a point (as does the deputy prosecutor) to warn potential jurors against jury nullification (sitting in judgment of an unfair criminal statute or its application) and to consider only the facts presented for/against an accused malefactor. In fact, jury nullification is a fundamental right retained by the people–a long history of precedent supports that right. But it’s best not to twist the lion’s tail by voicing an opinion on the matter to the court or other jurors. Save that exercise for your most intimate and trusted confidantes. Understand, your fellow jurors will behave as a room of snitches. Nothing you say is private, no matter how superficially innocuous. Be confident, but keep your mouth shut and your own counsel.

If you’re a defendant, file an affidavit of prejudice (a procedural right you have if exercised BEFORE Steele renders any discretionary rulings) ASAP with the court clerk. This will remove Steele from your case…unless you prefer a judge who set bail at $1,000,000 for a defendant who was cited for driving on a suspended license.

[Look here for future videos of George in all his judicial splendor, marking how obsequious local attorneys appearing in his court behave. It’s embarrassing.]

James Lindsay on Repressive Tolerance & Free Speech

The shocking assault on the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6 has been followed by widespread censorship and de-platforming of Americans, including President Trump, with the professed goal of preventing violence.

James Lindsay, co-author of the bestseller “Cynical Theories,” argues the Capitol breach has been used to implement a major power grab and “apply Leninism to the American context, using corporations as part of the toolset.”

This is the “woke” movement in action, Lindsay argues. The ideology involves an inverted morality, he says, allowing it to apply double standards when it comes to political violence.

In this episode, James Lindsay, founder of the New Discourses website, gives us his take on our current political moment.

Washington State Superior/Family Court (Mason County) Commissioner Robert D. Sauerlender typically presides over the domestic family court hearings/proceedings involving matters like juvenile court, divorce, child custody and support, maintenance, division of property, etc. Roy Cohn once said, “I don’t care what th law says, just tell me who the judge is.” There’s a lot of truth in that quote. Worse, Washington law provides no right to exclude a court commissioner through an affidavit of prejudice, only judges despite the fact a court commissioner has virtually the same effect as a judge when he/she presides. A dissatisfied litigant’s ONLY remedy is to seek a review de novo per the following authority:

Article 4, section 23 of the Washington Constitution and RCW 2.24.010 provide for the appointment of superior court commissioners.   By statute, commissioners are authorized to hear and determine a variety of matters including  juvenile offense proceedings.  However, in all matters decided by a commissioner the parties are entitled to revision by a judge of the superior court.  A party seeking revision of a court commissioner’s ruling must file a notice of the motion for revision within ten days of the ruling they seek to revise.  A demand for revision of a commissioner’s ruling is “an appeal to a superior court.”

This video reveals Court Commissioner Sauerlender adjudicating a distraught father’s motion to hold his ex-wife in contempt for foot dragging and alleged noncompliance with the visitation schedule of their parenting plan along with suggestions/hints she may have exacted alienation of his daughter’s affections in the bargain. Alienation of affections involving a child is, unlike for adults, actionable and all too common. Listen carefully to how Commissioner Sauerlender handles all this, bearing in mind these kinds of procedings often are adjudicated more on the fulcrum of the judge’s biases than the law. Judges are given wide latitude in such matters and Washington residents have no right to a jury trial for actions in equity. (e.g. Divorce/custody disputes). So choose your venue and judge wisely/carefully.

Washington State Superior/Family Court (Mason County) Commissioner Robert D. Sauerlender typically presides over the domestic family court hearings/proceedings involving matters like juvenile court, divorce, child custody and support, maintenance, division of property, etc. Roy Cohn once said, “I don’t care what th law says, just tell me who the judge is.” There’s a lot of truth in that quote. Worse, Washington law provides no right to exclude a court commissioner through an affidavit of prejudice, only judges despite the fact a court commissioner has virtually the same effect as a judge when he/she presides. A dissatisfied litigant’s ONLY remedy is to seek a review de novo per the following authority:

Article 4, section 23 of the Washington Constitution and RCW 2.24.010 provide for the appointment of superior court commissioners.   By statute, commissioners are authorized to hear and determine a variety of matters including  juvenile offense proceedings.  However, in all matters decided by a commissioner the parties are entitled to revision by a judge of the superior court.  A party seeking revision of a court commissioner’s ruling must file a notice of the motion for revision within ten days of the ruling they seek to revise.  A demand for revision of a commissioner’s ruling is “an appeal to a superior court.”

A motion for reconsideration pursuant to CR 59 also has a 10 day deadline with other requirements to avoid dismissal/denial. Thus, every effort should be made to learn the idiosyncrasies of the judge/commissioner likely to preside. You may have reason to challenge the judge/commissioner for cause and move to have him/her recuse themself, thus avoiding the need to file an affidavit of prejudice. Or you may find another venue also has jurisdiction and choose to file there instead. Toward that end, this video displays Commissioner Robert Sauerlender on the bench adjudicating an unsuccessful motion for reconsideration under CR 59 as part of a divorce proceeding involving a dispute over child support and maintenance requested by the wife.

“I want to protect, defend, build, enrich, inspire and unite with all Americans! We the People want results, progress, truth, encourage orderly immigration and reform—BUILD THE WALL-fix the system-defend America- the MSM to report facts, not agenda” -Ashli Babbitt-

Fanfare for Ashli Babbitt RIP (1-6-21)

Ashli was a beautiful young woman with a soul as big as the outdoors, passion, the courage of a lion and a heart to match. She will be missed.

Apparently, YouTube even censors the dead!

The National Guard, in full battle gear, takes over D.C. Congress is evacuated to a secret location.

An Unarmed woman protestor in the Nation’s Capitol is shot dead by D.C. Capitol police.

This video is being suppressed and was removed from YouTube under a thin pretext only a couple of hours after it was uploaded:

Ashli Babbitt shot & killed (1-6-21) in D.C. Capitol bldg

The cesspool of American jurisprudence needs the full attention of all the people if we are to survive it.